This guidance is provided for institutions that were asked to submit a Supplemental Rejoinder to address a standard or standards that the Board of Examiners recommended as met, but were found not met by the Unit Accreditation Board (UAB). The UAB has deferred its accreditation decision to provide the unit the opportunity to submit a Supplemental Rejoinder addressing the unmet standard(s).

Units preparing a Supplemental Rejoinder should respond specifically to the area(s) for improvement cited in NCATE’s "Accreditation Action Report" for the standard(s) that was found not met by the UAB. When the UAB reviews the documentation, it will also have access to the previous accreditation action report, the BOE report, and if available, the Offsite Report, IR Addendum, the institutional rejoinder and team chair response from the visit.

The Supplemental Rejoinder must:

Address only the area(s) for improvement under the standard or standards that were not met. Areas for improvement may have been cited for other standards, but they should not be addressed in the Supplemental Rejoinder. Describe what existed at the time of the onsite BOE visit. Changes made by the unit after the visit cannot be considered by the UAB in its deliberations.

Include evidence that supports the narrative related to the area(s) for improvement and that were available to the BOE team. Such evidence might include unit assessment systems, assessment instruments, budgets, policies, etc.

Relate the narrative directly to the NCATE standards and procedures that applied at the time of the onsite review.

The following are formatting and transmittal requirements for submission of the Supplemental Rejoinder:

A Supplemental rejoinder must be no longer than 25 pages plus appendices containing selected evidence to support the points made in the supplemental rejoinder.

Evidence must be submitted as appendices to the Supplemental Rejoinder and should not exceed 4 documents but should not exceed 25 pages in length. Links to evidence will not be accepted.

Specific sections of the submitted evidence that the UAB should review should be clearly marked.

The standard(s), each area for improvement addressed, and each document submitted should be clearly identified.

The areas for improvement being addressed should be restated with the language from the "Accreditation Action Report."

The evidence should be labeled so that it is clear which area for improvement it addresses. The evidence may be in appendices or in the body of the text.

The entire document, including appendices, should be paginated.

The rejoinder and any accompanying appendices must be transmitted to NCATE as electronic documents through AIMS.

The UAB will consider the Supplemental Rejoinder at its meeting following the deferral. If the UAB grants the institution first or continuing accreditation, the next visit will be scheduled consistent with the institution’s regular accreditation cycle. If the UAB is not satisfied that the areas for improvement have been adequately addressed, the unit will be accredited for 18 months with a focused visit on the unmet standard(s) or a full visit on all of the standards. Institutions will be notified of accreditation decisions within two weeks after the next UAB meeting.